Sounds good. :) On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 10:59 AM Jensen Zhang <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Kai, > > Great! This structure looks better to clarify those concepts. I would like > to support it. If nobody has another proposal against it, let's add this > change in the next revision. > > I can send a new draft to you by this weekend so that you can take another > pass before we upload the next revision. > > Thanks, > Jensen > > > On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 10:46 PM Kai GAO <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Jensen and all, >> >> Actually, I would suggest the following structure: >> >> - Basic Concepts >> - Information Resource >> - Entity >> - Entity Property >> - Entity Domain >> - Property Map <==== Explain how property map works and the motivations >> for exporting and aggregating entity domains >> - Resource-Specific Entity Domain >> - Aggregated Entity Domain >> - Resource-Specify Entity Property >> >> The two top-level sections (basic concepts and property map) are similar >> to Sec 2 (Terminology) and Sec 5 (Network Map) in RFC 7285. >> >> In the basic concepts section, we are describing what already exists even >> without the property map service. >> >> In the property map section, we are "inventing" concepts that serve >> certain practical purposes (e.g., provide indications of what >> entities/properties can be queried, aggregate entities/properties). >> >> Having said that, it is OK with me that we keep the current structure or >> only make some small changes if it requires too much work. >> >> Best, >> Kai >> >> >> >> On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 12:11 AM Jensen Zhang <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi Kai, >>> >>> I reviewed the document again. I think you are proposing the following >>> restructure, right? >>> >>> Entity -> Information Resource -> Entity Property (Resource-Specific >>> Entity Property) -> Property Map -> Entity Domain (Resource-Specific Entity >>> Domain, Aggregated Entity Domain) >>> >>> Intuitively it looks good. But when you look into the motivation of >>> Resource-Specific Entity Property, you will find it is weak here. Because >>> only when you use the Aggregated Entity Domain representation in a Property >>> Map, you will need this concept. Otherwise, it is useless. That is why I >>> put it behind those two concepts. But maybe your intuition is right. The " >>> Resource-Specific Entity Property" should be out of "Entity Domain". How >>> about we move 2.5.4 to 2.6? How do you think? >>> >>> Best, >>> Jensen >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 9:02 AM Kai GAO <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Jensen and all, >>>> >>>> I'm looking at the -10 version and find it quite odd to have 2.5.4 >>>> Resource-specific Entity Property as a subsection of 2.4 Entity Domain.. >>>> >>>> My suggestion is to move 2.5.4 to 2.2 instead. Another potential >>>> improvement is to move 2.4 Information Resource before 2.2. >>>> >>>> Best, >>>> Kai >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 5:28 AM Jensen Zhang < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Danny, >>>>> >>>>> Thanks for your review and comments. Sabine and I are working on the >>>>> next revision. We will address all the issues in the next revision. >>>>> >>>>> And for your additional comment, actually, the "ip-pid-property-map" >>>>> resource in IRD is an example of Aggregated Entity Domain. Sec 9.7 should >>>>> illustrate it. But you are right, the current example in Sec 9.7 does not >>>>> show the benefit of Aggregated Entity Domain. I will also revise this >>>>> example in the next revision. >>>>> >>>>> Looking forward to your further comments. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Jensen >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 9:50 AM Danny Alex Lachos Perez < >>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi Sabine, >>>>>> >>>>>> I have a quick additional comment: >>>>>> >>>>>> I believe that an example (sec. 9) of Aggregated Entity Domain is >>>>>> missing. >>>>>> Perhaps you could re-use (or extend) the IRD example [0] and try to >>>>>> add a couple of sentences to indicate equivalent entity property mappings >>>>>> (see slide 17, 18 in [1]). >>>>>> >>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>> >>>>>> Danny Lachos >>>>>> [0] >>>>>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-alto-unified-props-new-09#page-28 >>>>>> [1] >>>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/105/materials/slides-105-alto-unified-properties-for-the-alto-protocol-02.pdf >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Sep 24, 2019 at 10:42 AM Randriamasy, Sabine (Nokia - >>>>>> FR/Paris-Saclay) <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Danny, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Many thanks for your review. I saw your last comment is in Section >>>>>>> 9.7. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Should we consider that until section 9.7 your review is complete or >>>>>>> will you have more questions? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We look forward to your other comments, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sabine >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *From:* alto <[email protected]> *On Behalf Of *Danny Alex >>>>>>> Lachos Perez >>>>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 17, 2019 8:28 PM >>>>>>> *To:* IETF ALTO <[email protected]> >>>>>>> *Cc:* [email protected] >>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [alto] I-D Action: >>>>>>> draft-ietf-alto-unified-props-new-09...txt >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Dear authors, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I started to read the “*Unified Properties for the ALTO Protocol*” draft >>>>>>> (-09). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Please, see my first comments in the attached file (search for >>>>>>> '[DANNY]'). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Many of them are suggestions about clarity and format issues . >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I will continue the review and send additional comments in a short >>>>>>> time. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Danny Lachos >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 10:41 AM <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts >>>>>>> directories. >>>>>>> This draft is a work item of the Application-Layer Traffic >>>>>>> Optimization WG of the IETF. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Title : Unified Properties for the ALTO Protocol >>>>>>> Authors : Wendy Roome >>>>>>> Sabine Randriamasy >>>>>>> Y. Richard Yang >>>>>>> Jingxuan Jensen Zhang >>>>>>> Kai Gao >>>>>>> Filename : draft-ietf-alto-unified-props-new-09.txt >>>>>>> Pages : 43 >>>>>>> Date : 2019-09-04 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Abstract: >>>>>>> This document extends the Application-Layer Traffic Optimization >>>>>>> (ALTO) Protocol [RFC7285] by generalizing the concept of "endpoint >>>>>>> properties" to generic types of entities, and by presenting those >>>>>>> properties as maps, similar to the network and cost maps in >>>>>>> [RFC7285]. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: >>>>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-alto-unified-props-new/ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> There are also htmlized versions available at: >>>>>>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-alto-unified-props-new-09 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-alto-unified-props-new-09 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> A diff from the previous version is available at: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-alto-unified-props-new-09 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of >>>>>>> submission >>>>>>> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: >>>>>>> ftp://ftp...ietf.org/internet-drafts/ >>>>>>> <ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> alto mailing list >>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> alto mailing list >>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto >>>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> alto mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto >>>>> >>>>
_______________________________________________ alto mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
